Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by the appellants against the impugned order. The Tribunal held that the Department failed to discharge its burden of proving that the imported goods, described as "embroidery threads", attract anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 23/2012-Cus. The classification of the goods as "embroidery yarn" or "embroidery thread" required a physical scrutiny, product literature, examination report, or expert opinion, which were lacking. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order due to the absence of evidence to support the allegation made in the Show Cause Notice.
CESTAT allowed the appeal filed by the appellants against the impugned order. The Tribunal held that the Department failed to discharge its burden of proving that the imported goods, described as "embroidery threads", attract anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 23/2012-Cus. The classification of the goods as "embroidery yarn" or "embroidery thread" required a physical scrutiny, product literature, examination report, or expert opinion, which were lacking. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order due to the absence of evidence to support the allegation made in the Show Cause Notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
